| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 247.1 | swap hardware | GIDDAY::DRANSFIELD | Mike Dransfield, Sydney RSSG | Mon May 24 1993 21:29 | 7 |
| re; .0
Have you tried resetting the DECagent?
Hold in the recessed switch and power cycle.
If it still doesn't work, then swap the hardware.
I have seen this problem a couple of times.....
Mike
|
| 247.2 | | HOO78C::TURHAN | | Tue May 25 1993 03:55 | 8 |
|
I have tried almost all possible combinations, I think we need a new
hardware.
Thanks,
Tankut
|
| 247.3 | Some thoughts | QUIVER::GAUDET | | Tue May 25 1993 13:09 | 8 |
| Check the terminal settings (8-bit, no parity, one stop bit, 9600 baud).
You have to press CTRL-I before the second LED comes on in order to get
into CCI. May I ask why you need to get into CCI? If your agent is
running an experimental version of code that is later than X1.69 you
can upgrade to the latest available without going through the two-step
load process.
...Roger...
|
| 247.4 | how reliable is the DECagent 90 ? | HOO78C::TURHAN | | Tue Jun 01 1993 08:55 | 18 |
| Hi,
Do you mean the NDU when you say without going over the two step
loading process ?
By the way I started having some doubts about the quality of the
DECagent. The one I mentioned first time turned out to be defective, I
got a brand new one from Field service, which turned out to be "dead on
arrival" and now I got the third box seems to be running for the time
being.
Are there any mtbf figures for these boxes or are there any known
reliability problems ?
Regards,
Tankut
|
| 247.5 | DECagent 90 seems to have a very low MTBF! | CSC32::B_GOODWIN | | Tue Jun 01 1993 10:27 | 7 |
| I have seen several notes in this conference with concerns about the reliablity
of the DECagent 90. Well, now the agent I have in my lab has also died. I've had
it for about a month. I think someone from engineering should be looking in to
this.
Brad Goodwin
CSC/CS Network Support
|
| 247.6 | ME too | BSS::AMBER | Mark Amber, CXO3 LAN Mgr. (DTN)592-4645 | Wed Jun 02 1993 16:36 | 4 |
| Me too.
Out of the eight DECagent90's that I have installed, two of them have
already needed to replaced by Field Service (under warranty).
|
| 247.7 | Please send me your dead agents | EMDS::SEAVER | Bill Seaver, HUBwatch Mktg | Thu Jun 03 1993 00:00 | 6 |
| Would you be kind enough to send me the dead DECagents? I will have
CSSE look into them and see what the problem is. If you need me to
replace them with good agents when you send me the bad ones, let me
know. I want to get to the bottom of this.
Thanks.
|
| 247.8 | Bad DC-DC converter in DECagent | NAC::SEAVER | Bill Seaver, HUBwatch Mktg | Mon Nov 22 1993 21:27 | 42 |
| There seems to be a bad DC-DC converter in the DECagent...
From: NPSS::HOSKING 19-NOV-1993 14:10:52.68
To: BIGELOW
CC: WONKKA,HOSKING
Subj: failed DENMA's returned for evaluation
Michele
Re: Failed DENMA's returned for Evaluation:
Per your request here is a brief description of the 3 failed units
received from Art Filz.
o Two of the units had defective EIA DC-DC converters 20-32787-01.
Replacing the converters restored the units to functionality.
o The third had one of the Flash IC's slightly charred... I did not
diagnose that unit further.
Additionally, I had another "interesting" unit returned from Bill
Seaver, also with a bad EIA converter. Replacing the converter did not
restore functionality, and the LED's behaved strangely. Diagnose
shows that the 5170A octal driver has apparently been replaced with an
incorrect IC; which explains the LED behavior. I have not done
further work with this unit.
Based on my analysis/evaluations, the principal reliability item is
the above converter.
Component engineering is currently negotiating reliability improvements
with the two vendors who supply Digital with the DC-DC converter,
20-32787-01.
Let me know if I can be of further assistance.
Cheers!
Terry
|